Legal Opinion
In re City of Lockport
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 18, 1992PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: There is no merit to Marine Midland Bank’s contentions that the statutory period for redemption in this in rem tax foreclosure proceeding (RPTL 1124) was so short that it deprived the Bank of due process (see, City of New Rochelle v Echo Bay Waterfront Corp., 268 App Div 182, 190, affd 294 NY 678, cert denied 326 US 720) and that the City was unjustly enriched by its retention of the surplus proceeds resulting from a sale of the property (see, Sheehan v County of Suffolk, 67 NY2d 52, 59, cert denied sub nom. Mackenchnie v County of Sullivan,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- City of New Rochelle v. Echo Bay Waterfront Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1944
- City of New Rochelle v. Echo Bay Waterfront Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Sheehan v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Key Bank of Central New York v. County of BroomeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
3Cited by4 opinions
- Oneida Indian Nation v. Madison CountyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- In re the Foreclosure of Tax Liens by Proceeding in Rem Pursuant to Article 11 of the Real Property Tax LawAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Matter of Hoge v. Chautauqua CountyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- Oneida Indian Nation of NY v. Madison CountyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011